Steve: I didn't read the disclaimer. Apparently neither did the guys who posted right before I did either.
I was responding to them. The thread turned to this issue. So I reponded.
No I'm not in the insurance busisness. But I've been dealing with insurance companies for nearly 20 years. I'm an active member of the American Trial Lawyers Association. I do know a little about the subject.
I am not involved in med mal cases. Its not what we do in most cases. Have handled them before though when the case had true merit.
Doctors are not horrible. Never said that. Again words are being shoved into my mouth. Normal.
Insurance companies are indeed most of the problem. They pitch doctors against lawyers as in our current med mal "crisis" sit back and wait for the dust to settle and walk away with the spoils.
The insurance industry is one of the wealthiest industries in the country if not the world. Thats OK. They are entitled to make money. I however object to manufactured crisis' in order to further increase profits when the "blamed" cause or group has very little to do with the real reason why premiums are being increased.
Insurance play their little shell game. Breaking off into differenet divisions, property, causualty, life etc..so they can show less profit in the auto. Their profits in general are staggaring. In 1988 when insurance companies first cried about the fact they needed tort reform some of the leading complainers had profits in the Billions. Thats Billiions with a "B".
Again. Isn't it funny that each insurance premium crisis corrsponds with a down turn in the economy. Funny.
While I agree that frivilous lawsuits have no place in the system and should be thrown out they normally are thrown out. They make up an infinitesmal portion of the docket. No system is perfect.
I can't speak to PA. Maybe there are abuses there. Don't know. But I can speak about N.J. Don't trivilize "soft tissue" injuries. Except for your skeletal system the rest of your body is SOFT tissue. Is a herniated disc trivial? Is a torn rotator cuff trivial? Is a brachial plexus nerve injury trivial? Is a rupture of the small intestine requiring a hemi collectomy trivial. Scarring. Is that always trivial?
The answer by most is usually "yes" they are trivial unless its happened to them. Thats the problem.
N.J. has strict threshold laws that have drastically reduced the right to seek recovery for injury unless they are permanent and significant. The number of suits have dropped drastically. I know defense firms that have laid off half their lawyers because the cases don't exist anymore. Thats OK. Looks like it worked as far as getting rid of injury claims.
But why haven't premiums gone down. Why are the insurance companies looking to increase auto premiums again? Beats me. Somethings rotten in Denmark.
I agree with you. Rates continue to go up in N.J. because of PIP (personal injury protection benefits for medical bills). Fact. Attorneys have argued to get rid of PIP for years. The insurance companies resist everytime. Why? Because they continue to use it as a way to argue for increased premiums. They benefit from PIP in N.J. despite the fact they quickly cut treatment off. They force PIP arbitrations if the injured person wants and needs continued treatment according to the DOCTORS which means if the insurance company wins they can prevent the injured person from proceeding further even with their injury claim before a jury by arguing collateral estoppel. But if the injured person wins they don't get the benefit of collateral estoppel.
The doctors have it rough. No doubt. From the goverenment controlling what they can charge under medicare to the INSURANCE COMPANIES controlling what they can charge for medical care and what procedures they can utilize.
The problem is not the lawyer representing the injuried party. Not that frivilous cases don't exist they do as I said but they are statistically insignificant. The real problem is deciding what is frivilous. There are clear cases then there are not so clear cases.
The main problem is and always has been the insurance industry which is rapidly gaining control of everything from healthcare to court access.
I can't believe that if you or someone in your family was seriously injured by med mal (and when med mal happens the consequences are usally significant) you would just chalk it up to experience and look to see that it never happened again. How would you do that. By asking nicely? Don't think so.
Fact. Most people who are badly injured in mal practice or other accidents would rather not be injured and would happily trade the money back for being made well again. Neither you nor anyone else has the right to trivialize others injuries except the jury after all the evidence is weighed.
Tell the victims of mal practice who have been injured that they were in it for the money. Its easy for others to level that charge when its not them or a loved one.
Everyone has an axe to grind. Fact. My brother who is a heart surgeon told me that he is in favor of med mal reform. I told him that if the insurance companies could show us and prove that it was really "frivilous" lawsuits or the "crazy" awards that are causing the rocketing increse in premiums then I would be willing to sit down and listen and work on a remedy thats fair to everyone.
Fact. Insurance companies can't prove its related cause it ain't when the fact is awards have only increased a total of 2% over the past couple years.
I have a suggestion. Get rid of the 6% of the doctors responsible for 60% of the claims. That would be a good start. Then see where it goes.
Sorry for the rant.
Jamo: Emplyment cases are a diffenet animal. We are very selective in the cases we take from the plaintiff's end. They can be very difficult to prove, time consuming and expensive. Nuisance cases do exist in every area of the law. But again by and large a small percentage of the docket. Problem is I can't think of the perfect way of preventing some crap cases from getting filed from time to time except for invoking the "Frivilous lawsuit statute" which exist here in N.J. and in Fed Court. I do know that it is invoked here when merited.
I can't speak about auto cases in your jurisdiction. I only speak about what I know.